Snidely Whiplash and Dick Dastardly, Reporting for Duty!

• Via skippy:  "Voter ID laws are about disenfranchisement," which cites a Brennan Center for Justice report.

  Responding to an interview question about Republican’s chance at the presidency in 2016, U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothmann (R-Wisc.) responded, “Hilary Clinton is about the weakest candidate the Democrats have ever out up, and now we have voter ID and I think voter ID is going to make a little bit of a difference as well.” Grothman helped passed the voter ID law in 2011 when he served as assistant majority leader in the State Senate. In 2012, he claimed voter ID would help Mitt Romney win Wisconsin, saying, “[I]nsofar as there are inappropriate things, people who vote inappropriately are more likely to vote Democrat.”

  "Inappropriately." What do you suppose he meant by that? /rhetorical.
• Smudging the facts (Steve M., No More Mister Nice Blog)

  But those weren't rumors. They came from a rare first-rate campaign story in The New York Times, a genuine scoop by Yamiche Alcindor, based on an internal campaign document and a reliable source:
  
  [...]
  
  But hey, the press wants Trump and the GOP not to embarrass themselves and to get back in the race, so let's call these embarrassing facts "rumors," right?

  Link in original. Ellipsis is excerpt from story.
  
• Speaking of The New York Times:

  There’s more to the question of whether or not the Times is putting the same effort and the same interpretative rigor on coverage of Trump vs. Clinton, of course, and I will try to get to at least slightly more quantitative arguments in a later email. But if you want a case study why I, both a partisan and a practitioner and teacher of journalism, argue that the Times has its thumb on the scale, this story seems like a pretty powerful example.

  From a letter to a Times journalist from Tom Levenson, The Inverse Square Blog.  (Random sighting on No More Mister Nice Blog's blogroll.)